3 ms·

You left out the part where he expected and tried to get the $850M but FB’s lawyers pushed back and he settled after burning bridges. $50M is 0.7% of his net wo

You left out the part where he expected and tried to get the $850M but FB’s lawyers pushed back and he settled after burning bridges. $50M is 0.7% of his net worth last I checked (maybe it’s changed). Look, I’m glad they’re not still at Facebook but this is hypocritical posturing. They’re not giving the money back. They’re crying all the way to the bank.

fredoliveira 8y ago
Oh I'm not saying he's a saint, but that things like donating $50M to Signal are nothing to sneeze at or ignore.
gfodor 8y ago
At the level of wealth this guy has, allocating 0.7% to something is a notable action. Once you're at the level he is at your capital allocation is not about accruing material goods. Material goods are just a rounding error, just buy a few houses and park a few mil in a fixed income fund and you are set for material wealth for life. That leaves you several hundred million to deploy for influence and power. The opportunity cost of moving $50M around is huge.
ummonk 8y ago
It specifically says he didn't settle, because he didn't want to sign an NDA.
- abalone 8y ago
  Sorry I meant gave up after burning bridges. Their plan was always to bail before monetization kicked in and be able to say they had nothing to do with it. But you don't get a $19B valuation from Facebook for a text messaging arbitrage app without being fully aware of where that money will come from. That's why they didn't forbid it, only required accelerated vesting.
smitrendfelt 8y ago
$olid insight, friend. You're post is the only one that mentions the word hypocrisy. $uppose FB had hired him when he applied for a job. Now suppose he's a mid level manager with a net wealth of 10-20m instead of the co-founder of a messaging app worth over 1b. I seriously doubt he would have all of these ethical qualm$ and be leaving the company.

fredoliveira 8y ago

Oh I'm not saying he's a saint, but that things like donating $50M to Signal are nothing to sneeze at or ignore.

gfodor 8y ago

At the level of wealth this guy has, allocating 0.7% to something is a notable action. Once you're at the level he is at your capital allocation is not about accruing material goods. Material goods are just a rounding error, just buy a few houses and park a few mil in a fixed income fund and you are set for material wealth for life. That leaves you several hundred million to deploy for influence and power. The opportunity cost of moving $50M around is huge.

ummonk 8y ago

It specifically says he didn't settle, because he didn't want to sign an NDA.

abalone 8y ago
Sorry I meant gave up after burning bridges. Their plan was always to bail before monetization kicked in and be able to say they had nothing to do with it. But you don't get a $19B valuation from Facebook for a text messaging arbitrage app without being fully aware of where that money will come from. That's why they didn't forbid it, only required accelerated vesting.

smitrendfelt 8y ago

$olid insight, friend. You're post is the only one that mentions the word hypocrisy. $uppose FB had hired him when he applied for a job. Now suppose he's a mid level manager with a net wealth of 10-20m instead of the co-founder of a messaging app worth over 1b. I seriously doubt he would have all of these ethical qualm$ and be leaving the company.